Hot Topics:

SJC pulls Common Core repeal from Nov. ballot

The Lowell Sun

Updated:
07/02/2016 06:36:05 AM EDT

By Katie Lannan

State House News Service

BOSTON -- The ruling of the state's top court to throw a Common Core repeal initiative petition off November's ballot was an unusual one, according to an attorney who argued the case, while repeal backers said it shows the power of "special interest" groups.

The Supreme Judicial Court on Friday ruled that the initiative petition to end the use of the Common Core learning standards in Massachusetts contained separate issues that did not present a "unified statement of public policy," and that Attorney General Maura Healey had improperly certified the question put forward by the End Common Core Massachusetts campaign.

The court's decision means the question, which grassroots activists worked for months to advance, will not be put before voters in the November election.

"No emotions can express how disappointed we are with the decision of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court today," campaign Chairwoman and Worcester School Committee member Donna Colorio said in a statement.

Colorio called the ruling "disastrous" and "an example of big special interest money using intimidation tactics with scores of lawyers and public relations machines to do what is best for them and drown out the voices of the people."

Common Core supporters cheered the ruling and the learning standards it will allow to stay in place.

Advertisement

Board of Higher Education member and former Massachusetts Teachers Association President Paul Toner posted to Twitter describing the decision as "great news for the students and educators of & for supporters of high quality standards across the USA!"

The proposed ballot question sought to roll back the 2010 incorporation of the Common Core standards into the state's curriculum frameworks and revert Massachusetts to its previous standards. It also would have set up a new review structure for learning standards and mandated that education officials annually release all state assessment test "questions, constructed responses and essays, for each grade and every subject."

Filed in January, the lawsuit against Healey and Secretary of State William Galvin argued that the initiative was ineligible for the ballot because it asked voters to decide on unrelated policy matters. The court, in a decision written by Judge Margot Botsford, agreed that the Common Core repeal and the requirement to release test items were not sufficiently connected.

"By its nature this is a public process that often results in close calls," Healey spokeswoman Emily Snyder said in a statement. "We carefully consider all arguments before certifying a petition."

Plaintiffs in the case included Massachusetts PTA President Stephanie Gray, former Education Commissioner Robert Antonucci, and Massachusetts Business Alliance for Education Board Chairman William Walczak.

"The current standards focus on the skills and knowledge students need for success after high school," Walczak said in a statement. "Superintendents, principals, teachers and parents support these standards and tell us they are working for students."

The End Common Core campaign has argued that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has financially supported the MBAE in 2014 and paid for studies that support the continued use of Common Core while funding grants to special-interest groups who support Common Core.

"It's just another example of how Gates money has won," Sandra Stotsky, a petition supporter and former senior associate commissioner in the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, told the News Service on Friday.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Judicial Court upheld the certification of another ballot question, which would authorize a slots parlor with up to 1,250 machines at the former Suffolk Downs horse-racing track.

At least three other lawsuits regarding the certification of other ballot questions are pending before the SJC. The cases Allen v. Attorney General and Hensley v. Attorney General question whether an initiative petition to legalize the adult use of marijuana is fit for the ballot. In Dunn v. Attorney General, plaintiffs challenge the certification of a petition that requires all eggs sold in Massachusetts to come from hens who have sufficient room to move around.

Tad Heuer, the attorney who represented the plaintiffs in the Common Core case, said it "not very common" for the high court to rule against an attorney general's certification of a ballot question.

"The usual approach of the SJC is to say that, all things being equal, the decision of the attorney general is to be upheld," Heuer told the News Service. "It's much more unusual for the attorney general's certification to be reversed by the SJC."

Heuer said the initiative petition contained "too many moving parts" and would have left some voters to cast a single yes-or-no vote while having different opinions on its various components.

"This isn't the Legislature where you can negotiate, you can revise language, you can reach a compromise," he said. "The voters aren't given that opportunity."

Despite the ruling, petition supporters will "continue to fight," Colorio said, and will explore their options to determine next steps.

"There was never a doubt in our mind that if the truth was brought before the voters in November, Common Core would have ended in Massachusetts and the very best standards in the nation would have been restored," she said.

Welcome to your discussion forum: Sign in with a Disqus account or your social networking account for your comment to be posted immediately, provided it meets the guidelines. (READ HOW.)
Comments made here are the sole responsibility of the person posting them; these comments do not reflect the opinion of The Sun. So keep it civil.